430w or 420w?

[N941WR]

Originally Posted by Ironflight

I?d be careful about omitting the IFR GPS at this point in time., We upgraded Louise's panel to glass about three years ago, and since we were doing it on a budget, went with a non-IFR GPS panel - SL-30 for "legal" nav, with a 396 for Situational Awareness. It turns out to be harder and harder to find approaches that she can fly just a couple of years later - so many depend on a DME or GPS fix these days. Yes, you can always fly an ILS to 200 and a quarter - if there is one in the vicinity of where you are going. the IFR system is rapidly adapting to GPS as a primary, default Nav source, and going without it in a new panel is probably being a little penny-wise and pound foolish.

My opinion of course.
...
Paul

The above quote from Paul in another thread brings up an interesting question...

If building today, would you install a GNS 430w ($8,095) or put in a GNS 420w ($7,095) which is the same unit but without the VOR capability?

[vasrv7a]

Originally Posted by tadsargent

The regs state if your first intended airport is a GPS only approach then your alternate if necessary must be an approach other than GPS, there is no differentaion for WAAS. So not having a VOR/ ILS receiver does not meet the regulations

Finalizing my IFR training
The masters course in aviation without ever gettina degree

Please check the regs... I believe your statement is incorrect. WAAS approved GPS units may be used as sole source IFR... Period. VOR capability is not required to legally fly under IFR when using approved WAAS GPS units.

Passed my Instrument checkride last week.

Victor

[N18RA]

I am intending to use a 420W. But i am going to have an SL30 as my second radio. So i will have both GPS and ILS capabilities(when all is well) and if one fails i can still use the other for an approach if needed.

[Kahuna]

http://www.myrv10.com/tips/IFR/KeithThomassen.html

And what is the point of Bill R's ? Does it matter what the answer is for any particular pilot or choice? Some want vor, some dont. What difference does it make? I dont get the point of the question.

The acedemic exercise has been done on this IFR stuff for years.

[flyinga]

I went with the 420W in my under-construction RV8...no VOR antenna to mess with. In 9 yearts of flying my Bonanza with a 430W I've never had to use the VOR. Now almost every runway with an ILS also has an LPV approach. Save the $1000.

[apkp777]

Wait till March when Garmin announces their new avionics. As nice as a 430 (420) is, it's still due for a major update.

[Hens07]

I like the 420w with the SL30 combo. That way you get 2 comm radios and also have VOR/LOC/ILS/GS via the SL30. If you only want 1 comm radio with the LOC/ILS/GS then all you need is a 430w (since a 420w + SL30 is more expensive in combination).

That being said, I am excited to see what Garmin is coming out with!

[Dan B]

420W in my RV. The reason is access to more runways using RNAV w/vertical guidance. Many airports that cannot afford an ILS do have RNAV approaches. There are 2366 RNAV approaches with LPV minima, compared with about 1350 ILSs in the US.

[Hens07]

Now my personal question relating to this topic is.... If I want to get my IFR ticket in my RV. FIRST of all, is it smart to learn/practice only rnav approaches? SECOND, would a CFII be willing to do instruction and sign you off as being versed in the ways of IFR since you could not do the VOR, ILS, ect. THIRD, I doubt an FAA Examiner would be happy about it as well (where I live they are all very OLD SCHOOL and laugh at GPS's)... Just a thought

[tadsargent]

Not only is it smart to practice RNAV approaches its essential. Most airports have a GPS approach if nothing else.

I am finishing up my IFR training and It has been fun in the RV. It's unstable at first but you'll become better with experience. When the thermals subside late in the day and the wind dies down its just a piece of cake. The GRT EFIS for IFR is incredible, coupled to the 430/autopilot

Tad Sargent
7A

Below is from the current PTS
Aircraft and Equipment Required for the Practical Test...

...and for the performance of two of the following nonprecision approaches:
very high frequency omnidirectional range (VOR), nondirectional
beacon (NDB), global positioning system (GPS) without vertical
guidance, localizer (LOC), localizer-type directional aid (LDA), simplified
directional facility (SDF), or area navigation (RNAV) and one precision
approach: instrument landing system (ILS), GNSS landing system (GLS),
localizer performance with vertical guidance (LPV) or microwave landing
system (MLS). GPS equipment must be instrument flight rules (IFR)
certified and contain the current database.
Note: A localizer performance with vertical guidance (LPV) approach
with a decision altitude (DA) greater than 300 feet height above terrain
(HAT) may be used as a nonprecision approach; however, due to the
precision of its glidepath and localizer-like lateral navigation
characteristics, an LPV can be used to demonstrate precision approach
proficiency (AOA VI TASK B) if the DA is equal to or less than 300 feet
HAT.
FAA-S-